1 |
On 3 April 2010 16:12, Tobias Scherbaum <dertobi123@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> Am Samstag, den 03.04.2010, 16:40 +0300 schrieb Dror Levin: |
3 |
>> There is currently a wiki for gentoo at gentoo-wiki.com, which is |
4 |
>> running MediaWiki, so it would be easiest to transfer the content if |
5 |
>> we were to run the same software. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> This should happen (if at all) on a per article basis imho. Having the |
8 |
> option to do so (if we want to) is a plus we should consider, though. |
9 |
|
10 |
This also raises the question of license. Our current documentation |
11 |
mostly uses the CC-BY-SA license, while the unoffical wiki adds a |
12 |
non-commercial restriction. By choosing one license over the other |
13 |
we will make copy-pasting content from the source that has the other |
14 |
license, as far as I can see, illegal. I would say that interchange |
15 |
possibilities with our existing official documentation has priority. |
16 |
|
17 |
> Mediawiki sounds like what we want probably, mainly because it seems to |
18 |
> be the most popular one. |
19 |
|
20 |
I don't think that in itself is a very good argument. |
21 |
|
22 |
> Besides that: |
23 |
> - Ubuntu and Debian are using MoinMoin |
24 |
> - Fedora and OpenSUSE use Mediawiki |
25 |
|
26 |
I think we should consider the pros and cons of both these solutions. |
27 |
Does anyone have any links to the considerations that led these |
28 |
distros to make the choice they did? |
29 |
|
30 |
> In addition I'd like to establish a Wiki team with both developers and |
31 |
> experienced users who are able to review Wikipages (specifically every |
32 |
> revision of a page) and tag those pages as reviewed. |
33 |
|
34 |
I agree this is a good idea. |
35 |
|
36 |
Cheers, |
37 |
-- |
38 |
Ben de Groot |
39 |
Gentoo Linux Qt project lead developer |